• No results found

Social Innovation

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Social Innovation"

Copied!
71
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Social Innovation

-

Driving Forces of Social Innovation in MNC

Master’s Thesis 30 credits

Department of Business Studies

Uppsala University

Spring Semester of 2017

Date of Submission: 2017-08-07

Hoising Tam

Liudmyla Osadcha

(2)

i

Abstract

Multinational Corporations (MNCs) currently face not only a dynamic business environment and challenging profit target, but also increased expectations from the public to take responsibility for addressing social, economic, and environmental issues. There is a tendency that the leading companies in the global market, especially MNCs, put more effort to the Social Innovation (SI). This study is to investigate what drives the MNCs to be involved in social innovation. In order to find out the reasons, we make use of the literature related to social innovation and social entrepreneurship to develop a framework of the motivation of MNCs towards social innovation. The framework combines three different perspectives (Individualistic Perspective, Organizational Perspective, and Institutional Perspective) to describe the motivation of MNCs. It includes ten main factors: philanthropy, ethics, self-awareness, new business opportunities, interfuntional collaboration, corporate culture, laws and regulations, market demands, strategic collaboration and territorial development. The study is also built on rich data collected through semi-structured interviews together with secondary sources from four MNCs in the different industries: KPMG, Coca-Cola, Porsche, and Philips. However, the empirical evidence indicates a revised framework of motivations of the social innovation in MNCs, including six main factors: self-awareness, new business opportunities, interfuntional collaboration, corporate culture, market demands, and strategic collaboration. Our research made a step into unexplored field of motivation of the MNC being involved in SI and hopefully will go further to investigate the rationale for such involvement.

Keywords: Multinational Company (MNC), Social Innovation, Innovation Project, Driving

(3)

ii

Acknowledgements

Uppsala, 2017-05-30,

We would like to take the opportunity to thank everybody who has helped us and supported us while working on this study.

First of all we would like to give a special thanks to our supervisor, Christine Holmström Lind, Associate Professor in International Business and former Director of Advanced Studies at the Department of Business Studies at Uppsala University. You have spent countless hours giving us advice, motivating us, reading and rereading our drafts in order to make our paper the best it could be.

Second, we would like to express our gratitude to the members of our seminar groups who have given us valuable advice and helped us every step of the way.

Finally, we want to say a big thank you to all respondents who gave us opportunities to have the interview with them, especially those who spared their private time to cooperate with us.

Thank you all.

(4)

iii

Abbreviations

BOP Bottom of the Pyramid CEO Chief Executive Officer СoC Code of Conduct HR Human Resource

ICPDR International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River ICRC International Committee for the Red Cross

MNC Multinational Corporation NGO Non-governmental organization R&D Research and Development SI Social innovation

SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise

UN United Nation

(5)

iv

CONTENT

1.

INTRODUCTION ……….………..……….1

1.1 Problem Discussion……….….2

1.2 Research Question and Purpose……….…3

1.3 Outline……….……….….4

2.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK....………...…………...…………....5

2.1 Literature Review……….………...………...5

2.1.1 Social Innovation………..……….……….….5

2.1.2 Social Innovation and MNCs.………...…...….7

2.2 A Conceptual Framework………...…8 2.2.1 Individualistic perspective……….……….……..…8 2.2.1.1 Philanthropy……….…….….…9 2.2.1.2 Ethics………...………...…..…10 2.2.1.3 Self-awareness…….………...………..…10 2.2.2 Organizational Perspective……….………...…....11

2.2.2.1 New Business opportunities….………...………..…12

2.2.2.2 Interfunctional Collaboration………..12

2.2.2.3 Corporate Culture………...………...……13

2.2.3 Institutional Perspective……..………...13

2.2.3.1 Law and Regulations……….…...14

(6)

v

3.6 Operationalization……….…….………..24

3.7 Data analysis……….………...….24

3.8 Credibility: validity and reliability………...………..25

3.9 Ethical Consideration………...…….26

3.10 Limitations………...………...27

4. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS.……….………..……….……..28

4.1 Description of the companies...………....…………....28

4.1.1 KPMG Ukraine………..………..…28

4.1.2 Coca-Cola beverages Ukraine ………..…..………....…28

4.1.3 Porsche Holding………..……28

4.1.4 Philips………...….29

4.2 Social Innovation and Social Innovation Projects……….……..…..29

4.3 Driving Forces of MNCs towards Social Innovation………..…..31

4.3.1 Individualistic Perspective………...…...……31

4.3.1.1 Philanthropy………...………...…31

4.3.1.2 Ethics……….…32

4.3.1.3 Self-awareness………...32

4.3.2 Organizational Perspective……….…..……….33

4.3.2.1 New Business Opportunities………...….…...33

4.3.2.2 Interfunctional Collaboration………..………..…...34

4.3.2.3 Corporate Culture………..………...….35

4.3.3 Institutional Perspective……….…………..……..36

4.3.3.1 Laws and Regulations………...….…..36

4.3.3.2 Market Demand………..………....….36

4.3.3.3 Strategic Collaboration………...…...….37

4.3.3.4 Territorial Development………..………..…..38

5. ANALYSIS………..…………...……..39

5.1 Social Innovation and Social Innovation Projects...………..…....39

5.2 Driving Forces of MNCs towards Social Innovation……..………..………40

5.2.1 Individualistic Perspective………...…...….40

5.2.1.1 Philanthropy………..……40

5.2.1.2 Ethics……….…40

(7)

vi

5.2.2 Organizational Perspective………..……….…….41

5.2.2.1 New Business Opportunities……….…....41

5.2.2.2 Interfunctional Collaboration………..…..………...42

5.2.2.3 Corporate Culture………..……….….43

5.2.3 Institutional Perspective……….………..…..43

5.2.3.1 Laws and Regulations………..……….…...43

5.2.3.2 Market Demand………..…..…..….44

5.2.3.3 Strategic Collaboration……….………...….45

5.2.3.4 Territorial Development………..…..……..46

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS………...………47

6.1 General Conclusion……….………...…..47

6.2 Limitation and Suggestions for Further Research………...…….……48

REFERENCE………..……….………...…...…….50

APENDIX 1………..………..………..…...61

(8)

1

1 INTRODUCTION

“Innovation” is not a new term when it comes to the development of the business in the company. The initial purpose of most for-profit companies to be innovative is to develop themselves in a more efficient and effective way and maximize the shareholders’ value (Phillips et al., 2014). In other words, they usually associate the innovation of processes, products and services with the competitiveness (Ferauge, 2012), performance, quality, productivity and image of the company (Vilanova, Lozano & Arenas, 2009). In the past two decades, business is facing environmental and social changes (Birchall et al, 2014). At the same time, public actors and organizations like Multinational Companies (MNCs) are also faced with not only cost cutting, outsourcing, and industry consolidation mergers to meet profit targets (Mirvis et al., 2016), but also faced with increased expectations of the public and stakeholders to take a larger role in addressing social, economic, and environmental issues (Mirvis & Googins, 2006; Porter & Kramer, 2011). People also are more and more concerned with their living conditions, their quality of life and the improvement of social and economic issues (Ionescu, 2015). All these issues force the whole society with its public and private actors to find out new and proper solutions to solve these problems (Bulut, Eren & Halac, 2013; Matei & Drumasu, 2015). Organizations notice that many innovations should also address social problems or meet social needs, aiming to change relationships among stakeholders, which leads to social transformation (Centre de Recherche sur les Innovations Sociales, 2010). Such phenomenon is named as “Social Innovation (SI)”. This means SI could be considered to be the distribution of financial and social value tilted toward society as a whole (Phills, Deiglmeier & Miller, 2008). As a result, some leading enterprises start putting their effort on social innovation activities and they tend to consider the social value that they can bring to the community or the society in which they are involved.

(9)

2

1.1 Problem Discussion

Social issues indicate both opportunities and challenges for different organizations. For example, a problem like poverty, changing global climate and health care problem could be viewed either as a heavy burden or as the origin of starting innovation (Bitencourt et al., 2016). Social innovation emerges as a consequence of a new social matter, the low-efficient solution to a social issue or developing the current solutions. SI is widely perceived as the emerging of new social, organizational and institutional changes or some up-to-date products and services planned to address the social demands, to satisfy social demands, or to produce a solution to social change (Edwards-Schachter, Matti & Alcántara, 2012). The existence of SI is receiving the attentions of scholars, researchers, practitioners, policy makers (Moulaert & Nussbaumer, 2004; Mulgan, 2007; Howaldt & Schwarz, 2010)

The important role of SI successfully coping with social, economic, political and environmental issues has been recognized even on a global level (Moulaert, MacCallum, Mehmood, & Hamdouch, 2013). We can find that different sorts of public actors such as Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs), Cooperatives and Social-Purpose Organizations have already participated in projects that can deal with some main social problems and challenges (Bitencourt et al., 2016). Some researchers such as Moulaert & Nussbaumer (2004) and Matei & Drumasu (2015) have also mentioned the importance of these public actors in emerging countries in the SI field. Some of the MNCs create new business models that distribute affordable products to people at the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) by providing access to create the local employment and improve the local environment (Birchall et al, 2014). These leading companies not only put the innovation into action but also adopt and integrate social innovation into their core business (Herrera, 2015).

(10)

3

the performance of the company (Herrera, 2016) and link the SI to social needs, social transformation, organizational capabilities, resources and assets of the company (Adrian, 2013). Only a few researchers have discussed the intention of SI from a specific viewpoint, mentioning the specific elements or factors which can be viewed as the driving forces of SI such as Cajaiba-Santana (2014) who gives the analysis of SI from individualistic perspective (behaviorist viewpoint) and “structuralist perspective” (external structural viewpoint). Moreover, some researchers argue that the social innovation process requires more focus on individuals and agencies, especially on how these people think about SI, what they value much (Harrisson & Laberge, 2002; Cavalli, 2007). Additionally, some researchers are focusing on the organizational perspective, but they still do not examine excessively on MNCs’ aspect.

The tendency of an academic interest of MNCs participation in SI is caused by the fact that they played a significant role in politics and SI have been progressively recognized as responsible for social issues and environmental problems, like health care, issues of labor standards, and environmental damage (MacKinnon & Cumbers, 2007). MNCs also have a more influential impact on carrying out innovation project as well as developing SI in domestic and international markets (Zahra, Neubaum, & Huse, 2000). Being an important actor of SI, there is a still lack of theoretical or conceptual framework which can discover the driving forces of the MNC to conduct SI.

1.2 Research Question and Purpose

The question we aim to answer is:

“What are the driving forces influencing MNCs to conduct/be involved in the social innovation (projects)?”

(11)

4

From a theoretical viewpoint, our paper could be useful because there is no much information regarding the drivers behind of MNCs to conduct social innovation in the literature before. Our paper is focusing on the MNC aspect – what drives MNCs to participate in social innovation activities, which can help other researchers to understand the social innovation better and know the reason why MNCs would choose innovation projects for social change. From a practical point of view, our paper is useful to other companies which are interested in social innovation projects since MNCs can get knowledge which factors drive the SI project. Moreover, it could be useful as if they will get awareness of the industries and fields of social innovation which were discussed in this research.

1.3 Outline

(12)

5

2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In this section, we first introduce the concept of social innovation and also the relationship between the social innovation and MNCs. Then, we show why the motivation of MNC should be considered in three perspectives with identified factors which were classified from previously reviewed literature about social innovation and social entrepreneurship, followed by the theory summary.

2.1 Literature Review 2.1.1 Social Innovation

Social innovation is a comparatively new term, when it comes to not only the growth of the theoretical approaches “but also within the context of other approaches which put emphasis

on dispersed knowledge, decentralization and the capacity of communities and social groups to self-organize and formulate specific and new solutions to the problems they are dealing with” (Ionescu, 2015, p. 54). Moreover, more and more emphasis is put on the social

innovation in the society as a whole since people in the community are willing to find the proper method and solution to their daily problems (Bulut, Eren & Halac, 2013).

Due to the conceptual imprecision of SI (Pol & Ville, 2009), many researchers have different opinions and understandings of what constitutes social innovation and there are multiple uses of the term ‘social’ within the concept (Nicholls & Murdock, 2010). It includes new types as social collaboration, collective methods to delivering innovations, the role of the social actors (or civil society) at different phases of the social innovation process and the (positive) societal influence of these social innovations (Ayob, Teasdale & Fagan, 2016). Scholars are trying to conceptualize the “social innovation” and forming a framework on the social innovation to have a comprehensive picture of the role that social innovation plays in society (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014).

(13)

6

not correct that we have just connected the existing society-benefit outcomes of the so-called innovation project and program to the “social innovation” since both technical and social innovation can contribute the society in a positive way and bring good social impact. The main difference between these two concepts (technical and social innovation) is the intended result (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014). The main goal of social innovation is to contribute to the society and solving the social issue. We can also find the essential difference on the dimension of an immaterial structure of social innovation which is viewed as new social practices that will eventually become institutionalized, while technical innovations are directed at technological advancements to create new products or artifacts.

In terms of the definitions of SI, Birchall et al (2014, p3) have described the social innovation as following: “Social innovation refers to initiative, products or process that profoundly

change the beliefs, behaviors, cultures, power dynamics, basic routines and/or access to resources of any social system in the directions of greater equity, productivity and resilience” (p.3). Phills et al. (2008) approached SI from a business point of view and explain that SI is

an ideal solution to a social issue in a more effective, efficient and sustainable way and the value it brings about serves mainly for the society as a whole, rather than for private persons and individuals. On the other hand, Moulaert et al. (2005) shows the different opinion on social innovation, viewing it as “a set of radical practices that together led to greater social

inclusion and social justice via the changing of existing social (and particularly power) relations” (Ayob, Teasdale & Fagan, 2016, p. 645), which means that social transformation

to some extent is certainly involved in the reconstituting of social relationships. Although different researchers have their viewpoint on SI, social innovation is still widely perceived by public as the emerging of up-to-date social, organizational, institutional changes or new products and services planned to deal with the needs, to satisfy social demands, or to introduce solutions to social issues (Bitencourt et al., 2016).

To summarize, the purpose of social innovations contains meeting social demands,

improving life standards gradually and continuously, enrichment of capabilities of individuals/groups and increasing productivity of an organization; also, social innovation is regarding a general social changing, reducing inequalities and supporting deeper and further development to the society as a whole (Buchegger & Ornetzeder,

(14)

7

Social innovation has many different aspects in various fields such as technical innovation, management innovation, and organizational study regarding sustainable innovation, or research about territorial development (Moulaert, Martinelli, Swyngedouw, & Gonzalez, 2005; Lurtz 2012). In this perspective, social innovation includes different concepts, practices, policy tools, new types of collaboration and organization, processes and regulations that are developed and accepted by the public, and policy makers and so on, in order to satisfy social needs and to cope with social issues in a more efficient way than current system and practices.

2.1.2 Social Innovation and MNCs

Large firms are the main agency to arrange and manage the allocation of the resources and consume different sorts of products through a global network in order to operate (Dicken, 2011). Large firms operating globally (e.g. MNCs) have become leading actors on globalization and play an essential role on the global economy. More and more issues regarding the relationship between social innovation and large companies have been discussed in previous business literature (Sanzo-Perez, Álvarez-González & Rey-García, 2015). The concept of SI is comprehended to be a process of collective and shared creation of social relationships that includes different situations and diverse actors (Howaldt & Schwardz, 2010). Social institutions and organizations can be seen as the actors of SI concept and can be represented as private corporations, collective companies, and beneficiaries of private organizations (Correia, Oliveira & Gomez, 2016). Organizational actors in the civil society can identify its cooperation power and turn into an energetic proxy searching for the solution to deal with the social demands. Large dominant company among these organizational actors have had a better influence in politics and been progressively recognized as responsible for social issues and environmental problem, like health care problem, issues of labor standards, and environmental damage (MacKinnon & Cumbers, 2007).

(15)

8

than that of small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) because larger companies have a wider variety of knowledge inputs and skills (Pavitt, 1991).

2.2 A Conceptual Framework

The interpretation of the SI concept and the impact of SI on society were defined, and there are different definitions on that. However, there is no holistic framework of the intentions of social innovation developed by researchers. A conceptual framework illustrated by Cajaiba-Santana (2014) has just mentioned two perspectives of viewing social innovations, including the individualistic and structural perspective. While, the research of Herrera (2015) focuses just on framing the intentions of social innovation, especially from the institutional perspective which has meaningful implications for the company to participate in social innovation.

Due to the complexity of the motivation towards social innovation and there is no theoretical or conceptual framework about the driving forces of SI in MNC, we developed a conceptual framework. The driving forces of the SI were identified and classified into three levels of viewpoint for this research. Individualistic perspective (micro level) relates to individual actors and their motivation behind the conduction of SI. While organizational perspective (mezzo level) refers to MNC's engagement and internal forces which can be influential in the decision-making process. Institutional Perspective (macro level) focuses on the forces which "surround" the work of MNC as institutions and external forces.

2.2.1 Individualistic perspective

(16)

9

Social entrepreneurship is regarded as the process of utilizing the market-oriented means to cope with social issues (Grimes et al., 2013). Since both social entrepreneurship and social innovation is gradually considered to be contributing to a country’s social, economic, cultural and environmental wealth (Shaw & Carter, 2007), researchers show the evidence of linkage between social innovation and social entrepreneurship (Phillips et al., 2014). Bacq and Janssen (2011) likewise stated that the visionary individuals such as heroic entrepreneurs would like to create and develop some innovative solutions to the social issues of the community which they are involved in. Their decision to focus on dealing with the social problem is usually stimulated by their personal attitudes (Kickul & Lyons 2012).

2.2.1.1 Philanthropy

One of the phenomena which can drive social innovation – is philanthropy. After Great Depression interest in philanthropy increased as if wealthy individuals could fight with poverty and enhances social innovation that leads to the development of the communities and increasing awareness of the power of citizens (Maclean, Harvey & Gordon, 2013). Definition of entrepreneur philanthropy developed by Harvey et al. (2011, p. 428 ) states “the pursuit by

entrepreneurs on a not-for-profit basis of big social objectives through active investment of their economic, cultural, social and symbolic resources.” However, nowadays, scholars talk

about corporate philanthropy as a tool for social engagement in the organization which linked with empathy and compassion. (Muller, Pfarrer & Little, 2013)

Based on the model of Mair & Noboa (2006), a related concept, empathy is raised as an element for an individual’s attitude to start conducting social activities and innovation. Representatively, empathy is acknowledged as a person’s capability to assume what emotions other people have (Preston et al., 2007) or a possibility to react to another person’s mental condition emotionally (Mehrabian & Epstein, 1972) or pityingly (Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010). Thus, it is reasonable that empathy is usually recognized as an essential factor for the intention of doing social activities by scholars such as London (2010), Miller, Grimes, McMullen, & Vogus (2012).

(17)

10

be driven by philanthropy as it helps “to restore social equilibrium and alleviate social ills” (Maclean, Harvey & Gordon, 2013, p. 757).

2.2.1.2 Ethics

“Social innovation therefore explicitly refers to an ethical position of social justice.” (Moulaert et al., 2005). People are more and more aware of social problems which lead them to search for the solutions in order to improve the social welfare. MNC having the power and capacities can fight with social issues together with consciousness people in MNC’s can enhance and introduce new solutions because of their ethical beliefs and moral perceptions.

The decision of beginning innovation to complete social mission is usually driven by a person’s ethical and moral consciousness (Kickul & Lyons, 2012). Kaiser (2006) has found that an individual’s moral perception plays an important role on one’s behavior. Hemingway (2005) and Koe Hwee Nga & Shamuganathan (2010) identify ethic and morality as an important element of social entrepreneurial intention.

Trevino (1986) argues that during the decision-making process each person facing with ethical dilemma will react differently on the basis of individual and situational components. Ethical behavior takes the start from the personal characteristics of ego strength, field dependence and locus of control (Hemingway, 2005). Kohlberg proposed the theory that morality has progress through the levels and stages, what makes people grow from self-interest to independence of mind on ethical grounds. However, Trevino (1986) states that managers during the decision making process address to social context, rather than deciding themselves.

2.2.1.3 Self-awareness

(18)

11

In terms of the self-awareness, there is another concept we have to mention, which is called as generation units because it is useful for understanding heterogeneity in various results in any given period and understanding social transformation (Elder, 1999). Generation units refer to the all the people who are having the same or similar age, sharing at least a part of the identity of a certain community (Joshi, Dencker, Franz, & Martocchio, 2010). For aging adults, the motivation of social entrepreneurs for focusing on the social mission results from a combination of their personal demands for resources and their antipathy to risk (Spulber, 2014). Young generations are lacking in materials and assets while the elder can be conscious of opportunities costs better and avoid being risky (Lippmann & Aldrich, 2015).

Experience could be another important related element which has an influence on one’s self-awareness. According to Hockerts (2015), the prior experience with social issues is the predictor of being involved in social innovation and solving social problem, which makes us think that it could also play an essential role in the engagement of individuals in MNCs on social innovation projects. Many researches reveal that prior family exposure (Carr & Sequeira, 2007), as well as previous working experience (Kautonen, Luoto, & Tornikoski, 2010), should be view as one of the predictors of social innovation intentions. According to Ernst (2011), prior knowledge about social problems could be considered to affect the attitude of a certain person to work on social missions.

2.2.2 Organizational Perspective

Companies are more and more aware of their influence on people, nature, environment, and planet. While individualistic perspective talks about the individual as a one who has an influence on decision-making process and can be the initiator of the SI, organizational perspective talks about factors which are under control of the company. Organizational perspective relates to the internal capabilities, structure, and rules of the organization, which can have an influence on the decision-making process connected to SI. Taking into account resource-based theory which talks about the synergy of the company’s internal capabilities and resources in order to create a competitive advantage (Grant, 1991), some factors can be identified as drivers of MNCs towards the social innovation.

(19)

12

Companies are facing fierce competition, different external pressures thus it is vital for the company to find new business opportunities in order to compete and create competitive and comparative advantage (Parés, 2015).

Caulier-Grice et al. (2012) define that “social innovations refer to the business strategy of the

company and take part in changes in human, institutional and social capitals” (p.6).

Developing the topic, business strategy is considered to be an aspect of social innovation drives to higher competitiveness and efficient organizational system. However, Caulier-Grice et al. (2012) argue that it improves sustainability and effectiveness of nonprofits. In the other hand, Saul (2011) states that social innovation is not only strategic philanthropy, but it can also be seen as a business strategy which is used to create positive social change.

Matei et al. (2015) stated that long term vision together with strategy improves the innovativeness in the company. A Strong strategy for social innovation can enhance knowledge transfer (Rana et al., 2014). Companies are searching the ways to be updated and bring new values and find new business opportunities. Implementation of socially innovative business strategy leads to the economic success and productivity gains, meaning that it is a great opportunity for the company to improve the business situation (Schmitt, J., 2014).

2.2.2.2 Interfunctional Collaboration

Interfunctional collaboration can be defined as collaboration and integration between various departments within the organization in order to create a stronger networking and enhance transfer of information between business units (Narver & Slater, 1990). Auh and Menguc (2005) stated that it could be seen as a mechanism which helps to achieve the common goal in the organization as if knowledge, experience, and education can be shared. Researchers argue that higher level of interfunctional collaboration conduct to organizational innovation (Auh & Menguc, 2005).

(20)

13

internal network which will synergize knowledge, skills, and competencies is huge as if it can drive the improvement of sustainable innovations (De Medeiros et al., 2014).

2.2.2.3 Corporate Culture

Corporate culture is one of the factors that set the strategies and values shared in the company which is responsive to internal and external factors (Westley et al., 2014). Corporate culture makes the employees understand business strategies and steps of the company (Hemingway, 2005). Herrera (2015) states that corporate culture can be defined as shared beliefs and values inside of the company which all the employees agree and share. Herrera (2015) also identifies corporate culture as one of the implicit drivers which affects employee’s commitment that encourages social innovations.

Corporate culture is a strong tool for the organization to represent solutions and social integration (Arnold, 2010). Ethical decisions making process in organizations, for example, implementation of some approaches can be influenced by corporate culture as well as by the employee’s personal values (Hemingway, 2013). In addition, corporate culture can also have

“a profound effect on ethical/unethical behavior in most people,” and it refers to the rules of

how everything is set up in the organization (Trevino, 1986, p.614).

Osborne & Brown (2005) stated that innovativeness in companies could be influenced by “a

function of organizational characteristics, but also by internal culture, external environment and institutional framework” (Bason, 2010, p 24). This means that in order to enhance

innovations companies need to build up strong corporate culture which is going to improve the generation of new ideas for social change (Matei et al., 2015). Grimm et al. (2013) argue that entrepreneurship and organizational culture bring “opportunities for individuals and organizations to develop social innovation.”

2.2.3 Institutional Perspective

In terms of the institutional perspective, it is the most “attractive” perspective in the area of social innovation study, and it reveals that the social structure and social context will be the causation driving forces for social innovation (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014). Lettice & Parekh (2010) have done a qualitative study on SI through analyzing ‘…how the social innovators

(21)

14

way’ (p.155). Klein et al. (2010) also address the structural determinants of SI through the

socioeconomic geography. The existence of institutional viewpoint in the field of SI can be illustrated by the influence of structural functionalism on organizations (Lounsbury & Ventresca, 2003). In our research, institutional perspective, as macro level, focuses on the forces which "surround" the work of MNC as institutions and external forces.

2.2.3.1 Law and Regulations

Much literature regarding the motivation of social innovation describe that the formulation of legislation can put the pressure on the different organizations for being innovative and putting their effort to the new technologies and investment on R&D (Bossle et al., 2016; De Medeiros et al., 2014; Hansen et al., 2009). Large firms are more likely to get used to the new changes of the laws and regulation and respond with the innovation since they have the assets and resources to catch up with the updated regulations and have more possibility to take the risk of being the first mover in the markets (Alderin & Do, 2016).So, laws and regulations could be seen as an essential driving force for MNCs to implement social innovation, which is usually called as the “regulatory push” (Stewart, 1981; Hansen et al., 2009; Alderin & Do, 2016; De Santis & Jona Lasinio, 2016).

(22)

15

2.2.3.2 Market Demand

Market demand refers to requirements from different sorts of public actors such as suppliers, consumers, competitors, consultants, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which companies are connected with (Bossle et al., 2016). Customers play an important role as a stakeholder group since innovation depends on consumers’ willing to accept and to purchase such innovations (De Medeiros et al., 2014). Yunus et al. (2010) associate two concepts related to the consumer in the business model – value proposition and value constellation. Value proposition means who the customers are and what the perceived value of order while value constellation means how the offer is delivered to consumers (Alegre & Berbegal-Mirabent, 2016). This means that customers have their own certain needs, especially mainly about the environmental issues, social issues and etc. It is matched with the benefits of the company if they are responding to the customers’ offer characterized by the traits meeting the specific demands (Michelini & Fiorentino, 2012). When Bossle et al. (2016) are discussing the drivers for adoption of eco-innovation, he also illustrates that companies must innovate for technological opportunities and market dynamics, but also react to changes in customers’ needs and lifestyles. Ball (2005) reveals that the rapidly changing customers’ needs and expectations result in constant social innovation processes. At the time that consumers is becoming more and more sensitive and concerned about the social problem, they can react aggressively with firms’ not having a positive response to the social issues by resisting to buy products or services of the company (Alderin & Do, 2016). In contrast, consumers can also increase their loyalty if companies show their aspiration to conducting business regarding solving social challenges (Ketata et al., 2015).

2.2.3.3 Strategic Collaboration

(23)

16

Sanzo-Perez, lvarez-González & Rey-García (2015) stated two crucial points: that social innovations can generate the profit and that collaboration with customers and not-profit organizations can result in higher innovativeness. Thus, social innovation related to strategic collaboration “that cross organizational boundaries and jurisdictions” (Matei et al. 2015). Collaboration between different actors and sectors enhance social innovation which can be “interpreted as a process of co-creation in which the members of a certain collective

unit learn, invent and lay out new rules for the social game of collaboration and of conflict or, in a word, a new social practice, and in this process they acquire the necessary cognitive, rational and organizational skills” (Crozier & Friedberg, 1993, p.19). Companies can gain

knowledge and competence via different innovation project, partnerships and multi-stakeholder cooperation (Alderin & Do, 2016). According to the study of Mair & Schoen (2005), value networks and complementary partners are the key elements to create social value (Alegre & Berbegal-Mirabent, 2016). Confirming that, successful collaboration can lead to improvement not only in business but also in improvement of the quality of life in certain communities (Edwards-Schachter, Matti & Alcántara, 2012). As a consequence, we could believe that MNCs’ strategic collaboration acts as an “invisible” hand to put MNCs forward to participate in a social innovation project. However, sometimes MNCs find it not easy to have a dialogue with stakeholders and to build up the cooperation with external organizations, strategic alliances (Arnold, 2010) because it is highly time-consuming and demanding (Alegre & Berbegal-Mirabent, 2016).

2.2.3.4 Territorial Development

Social innovation could be viewed as the process of changing social relationships (Moulaert et al. 2013). According to the study of Moulaert & Nussbaumer (2004), this sort of process includes the transformation of social movements which strengthen forming local or global network, developing, governmental mechanism or organization culture in a territory. Territorial development refers to “the social dynamics that contribute to the building of

alternative, more appropriate, social relationships, aspirations and governance practices”

(24)

17

such as ‘empowering’ and emancipatory (Jessop et al. 2013). The third point is that the suitably transformed social and power relationships among social actors and the governing patterns caused by them, increases new social value (Moulaert et al. 2005).

The study of Van Dyck & Van den Broeck (2013) shows that social innovation researchers describe that territorial development has the connection with the ability of the territory to convert and change social relationships and to the embeddedness of relational assets in the network. According to this explanation, territorial development will hinge upon the creation of networks in which the involved actors can transform their modes of relating to increase their control over these modes and their impact on development trajectories (Van Dyck & Van den Broeck 2013), which indicates that social innovation is indispensable for territorial development. In other words, the territorial development motivates social actors to participate in the social innovation process.

2.3 Theory Summary

(25)

18

refers to external factors which is not under control of the company, including laws and regulation, market demands, strategic collaboration and territorial development. Finally, we have formulated our framework about the driving forces of MNC towards social innovation.

(26)

19

3 METHOD

This chapter presents the method which was used in order to discuss and answer the research question. Furthermore, we gave details of the research design, approach, strategy and data collection method, followed by a discussion of the validity and reliability of the study.

3.1. Research Design

In order to answer the research question, there is a need to decide on research design (Saunders et al., 2009). A suitable way to answer the research question about driving forces of MNC’s involvement in SI can be done by an exploratory study, as the best research method which will fulfill the gap in the literature and provide with new insights. As if the research question is not explored and there is a lack of literature, exploratory study was chosen as the best way to know “what is happening; to seek new insights; to ask questions

and to assess phenomena in a new light” (Robson, 2002, p. 59). Flexibility will be an

advantage for our study as if it will allow us to adjust our research during collection of the data. Saunders et al. (2009) also state that new occasions will drive the process and give a more precise picture of the research, and Adams & Schvaneveldt (1991) mention that flexibility will allow varying focus during the research progress. However, we understand the raised limitation of the study, and we consider that our study will give the push for the researchers to step into the creation of a conceptual framework aiming at studying MNC’s involvement in Social innovation.

(27)

20

3.2 Research Approach

Deductive, inductive and abductive reasoning are approaches which can be used in the research (Saunders et al., 2009). While deductive approach is usually used to evaluate and confirm a developed theory, the inductive approach uses data to develop a new theory. In our research, we use the abductive approach as it is a synergy of both approaches in order to combine empirical data and theory (Järvensivu & Törnroos, 2010). The reason for this is that this research is trying to create a unified conceptual framework; the data which we collect modifies the previously analyzed literature and gives new knowledge to the research question. As a consequence, the research question about driving forces of SI in the MNC will be investigated from the company's perspective and data collected will be taken into account during conceptual framework adjustment.

3.3 Research strategy

Research strategy is a general plan to conduct the research study and answer the research question (Saunders et al., 2009). One of the issues for the thesis is to decide and adhere to the chosen research design and approach to achieve the goal of the study.

With regard to investigating the driving forces of MNCs towards SI as the aim of our study, we look on SI from the unified views. Creating a conceptual framework, we want to get knowledge on the driving factors for MNC’s to be involved in SI. There is little knowledge on viewing the motivation of MNCs towards SI from the unified concept. As a consequence, we decided that case study as a strategy will give us the possibility to investigate new phenomena in the company and collect data which will allow us to answer the research question. Morris & Wood (1991) stated that case study strategy best suits to gain an understanding of the context, moreover, answering the questions of ‘why?’, ‘what?’ and ‘how?’, case study strategy will allow collecting meaningful information for our study (Yin, 2003).

(28)

21

information which will contribute to establishing the understanding of the phenomena within different cases (Saunders et al., 2009).

3.4 Case selection

Sample selection is an important procedure for the case study research strategy as if the reliability of the information depends on the selection of suitable company for the research question (Saunders et al., 2009). First of all, for our study we have defined the criteria which company needs to meet, those are: being MNC, engagement in social innovation, social innovation is a continuous campaign. Making a list of the enterprises that fulfill the criteria, it was important to check if the cases were meeting the purpose of the study (Ghauri & Grønhaug 2010).

The important part is that it is arduous to get access to the company’s data (Saunders et al., 2009), for this reason, convenience sampling was used to contact the company. Using our network, we approached with familiar managers in the company who redirected us to the people in the company working or involved in the area of the SI. This enables us to succeed in getting an agreement for interviewing our research and guaranteed the ability of the collection of data. The case companies are Philips, KPMG, Coca-Cola, Porsche as an example of multinationals operating in different industries and continuously conducting the SI. The managers interviewed were working or involved in social innovation, so they were aware of the topic and can provide with valuable information for our research. However, convenience sampling considered to be biased it can be used for pilot studies (Saunders et al., 2009), which can be fully utilized in our case for the creation of a new conceptual framework.

3.5 Data collection

(29)

22

3.5.1. Primary data

In this research, primary data will be collected by semi-structured interviews from the managers who are engaged or do take part in the social innovation projects in the company. Interviews help us to gather reliable and specific information, together with rich and empirical data which will allow us to answer the research question (Saunders et al., 2009). Semi-structured interviews will allow receiving different views on the research question as if depending on the answers from the interviewer the direction and questions can be adjusted and specified. This means that during the interview we can gather some information which was not mentioned before and it can help to fulfill the research aim. Together with that insider's information was collected as if some projects are not being implemented yet, so there is no report or printed information. Table 1 shows basic information about the interviewers collected from KPMG (1 manager), Coca-Cola (3 managers), Porsche Holding (2 managers: 1 in Ukraine/1 in Austria), Philips ( 3 managers: 2 managers in USA/1 in Netherlands) with whom were conducted interviews using Skype (5 interviews) or face-to-face (4 interviews). The usage of Skype was essential as if the interviewed company were located in different countries as the US, Austria and Netherlands. Considering the time difference, time limits and the possibility of gathering information, face-to-faces conversation were also used as if it helps to establish good relationships, calm atmosphere and you can observe the behavior and reactions to the questions.

3.5.2 Secondary Data

(30)

23

helped in the understanding of SI in the company and interviews will allow combining and developing an overview of the forces.

Position (seniority) Respondent Duration Company (location)

Audit Assistant (1 year)

Respondent 1 45 min KPMG Ukraine (Ukraine, Kyiv)

Specialist of corporate social responsibility (1 year)

Respondent 2 45 min

Coca-Cola beverages Ukraine (Ukraine, Kyiv) Specialist of corporate

social responsibility (8 months)

Respondent 3 35 min

Leading expert of ecology (12 years)

Respondent 4 30 min

Financial trainee (6 months)

Respondent 5 45 min Porsche Holding (Austria, Salzburg)

Economist (1 year 4 month)

Respondent 6 1 hour Porsche company Ukraine (Ukraine, Kyiv)

Senior director for national property, portfolio and strategy (10 years)

Respondent 7 35 min Philips (USA,Boston)

Social innovation Project manager (10 years)

Respondent 8 45 min Philips (USA,Boston)

Public Affairs at Philips (25 years) / Program Manager in Philips Foundation (4 years)

Respondent 9 35 min Philips, Philips

Foundation (Netherlands, Amsterdam)

(31)

24

3.6 Operationalization

The aim of the study is to explore the driving forces of MNC to conduct the SI. Four leading multinational companies in different industries being our case study companies were interviewed in order to bring the understanding of the factors which are influencing companies’ involvement in SI. The interview guide (Appendix 1) for the companies was developed according to the conceptual framework created for this research. With regard to the need to operationalize the interview guide, Appendix 2 was developed for the purpose of ensuring the relevance of the question to research question and aim on the basis of the conceptual framework. First questions are related to the general information about the manager and his work, general information about the social innovations of the company, as well as the factors, drivers, motives which are leading to the social innovation.

Our interview guide (Appendix 1) can be seen as a complete version of what we asked. However, the questions about factors were asked in accordance with the answers we were getting from the manager during the interviews. Meaning that we started the interviews with general information to make the person not to be stressed, and we went on to the questions about the SI to develop a general idea of what exactly the company’s SI projects look like. Coming to the questions about the factors, the open question about the factors was asked first. Then, based on the previously collected information, we specifically ask the questions which might help us to enclose more information about driving factors leading to SI.

3.7. Data analysis

(32)

25

& Bell, 2015). After making a summary and classifying the collected data which was presented in the empirical findings chapter. Empirical foundation section showed structured data which gives the clear understanding of the drivers in the specific company. As if our interview guide was fully connected to our conceptual framework, our analysis section combined the conceptual framework together with empirical findings to analyze the result and evaluate the accuracy of the framework (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

3.8 Credibility: validity and reliability

Merriam (1998) argues that research quality is an important aspect of identifying the trustworthiness and credibility of the research. In our research, the focus on the credibility is essential as it reduces the possibility of wrong answers. Credibility is formed with validity and reliability, and it can ensure our research quality (Saunders et al., 2009).

Validity refers to the interpretation of the findings collected, taking into account if the data’s assumption keeps sequences with earlier research (Silverman, 2007). Bryman and Bell (2015) argued that these are internal and external validity. Internal validity refers to the building the causal relation among conditions and outcomes according to the conceptual framework which is used for the research (Yin, 2003). In our case, the questions were developed on the basis of the conceptual framework, and all the explanations to the questions were provided to the respondent as well. On the other hand, external validity refers to generalization process meaning the need to understand if our findings will be applicable in other situation. Using the multiple case study instead of the single one can improve our applicability (Saunders et al., 2009), disclosing the different cases of leading MNCs.

(33)

26

as well as interpreting the results together. Moreover, using triangulation techniques we tried to ensure that the information is collected from several sources sustaining sequences (Yin, 2003). Using secondary and primary data was possible for us to reinforce the findings of the study (Saunders et al., 2009).

3.9 Ethical Consideration

For any research, ethics should be considered as an important issue when making the plan for research, searching the access to the institutions and individuals, and collecting data (Saunders et al. 2009). Different kinds of the ethical research arguments are presented in the literature when having this sort of study. Saunders et al. (2009, p.186) define seven important general ethical issues. These issues are: participants’ privacy; voluntary nature in the process of participating and the right to revoke from the process; the existing or potential deception towards participants; reservation of the confidentiality of data supported by participants and their incognito; responses of participants towards the method of researchers to receive data, including embarrassment, stress, discomfort, pain and harm; the influence of the way to use, analyse and report data on participants; behavior and objectivity of you as researcher.

(34)

27

3.10 Limitations

The limitation which this thesis consists should be highlighted due to the consequences of the decisions made during the research and it is important to disclose them in this section. Taking that into account, for both of us, it was the first time to introduce qualitative study. The main concern was our ability to critically analyze the primary data and compare it with knowledge gained from secondary data. Existing limitation of subjectivism and the fact of our inexperience might lead us to lose the focus on the main aspect considering less important (Bryman & Bell, 2015).

(35)

28

4 EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

The following chapter will represent the primary and secondary data. Interviews were classified and summarized in order to present general information about SI as well as introducing drivers of the SI using our conceptual framework described before. Secondary data was collected from the companies’ websites to describe the company's general information about the SI they conduct.

4.1 Descriptions of the companies 4.1.1 KPMG Ukraine

KPMG ("Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler") was founded in 1987 and started its operation in Ukraine in 1992. Nowadays, KPMG operates in 152 countries and has 189,000 employees globally (KPMG, 2017d). The core business of the company is auditing, KPMG offering 3 types of the services as audit, tax, and advisory. Company works with clients, analyzing and giving advice about possible risks and opportunities. (KPMG, 2017b)

4.1.2 Coca-Cola beverages Ukraine

Coca-Cola Company was founded in 1886 and nowadays Coca-Cola Company operates in 200 countries (Coca-Cola Company, 2017a). Coca-Cola beverages Ukraine started its operations in 1992, as a subsidiary of Coca-Cola Hellenic group which is a franchised bottler of The Coca-Cola Company. Coca-Cola beverage Ukraine is the biggest companies in the soft beverage industry in Ukraine. The core business is production and distribution and selling of the Coca-Cola products. (Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company, 2017a)

4.1.3 Porsche Holding

(36)

29

4.1.4 Philips (US subsidiary and Netherlands HQ)

Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Royal Philips of the Netherlands, commonly known as Philips) was founded in 1891 (Philips, 2017c). It is one of the largest electronics companies in the world. However, nowadays company focuses on healthcare solutions and innovations in this field (Philips, 2017a). Company employs around 105,000 people across more than 60 countries (Kelltontech, 2017). The core business is focused in the areas of healthcare solutions, personal health, and lighting solution (Philips, 2017b). In 2014 Philips launched the Philips Foundation - is a registered charity organization which is fully working on the social project as well as innovation for social welfare (Philips Foundation, 2015; Philips, 2017e).

4.2 Social Innovation and Social Innovation Projects

KPMG Ukraine implies lots of non-profit education activities as “Ukraine is looking for

Start-Up,” KPMG Innovation Day and regular competitions for students, held in various areas of professional competence, etc. (Respondent 1). Respondent 1 stated that while in developed countries all those activities are not considered anymore as innovative, however “in Ukraine all initiatives are coming with a slight delay.” KPMG Ukraine was the first company to introduce the social innovation project which is mainly about educational collaboration with university investing in the future specialists. For instance, HR in KPMG Ukraine, Julia Shulga, stated: “the "KPMG Laboratory" project in KNEU is one of the most

ambitious educational projects of KPMG in Ukraine, it is unique across the whole country”

(KPMG, 2017a). Respondent 1 also mentioned that he has participated in “KPMG

Foundation” (KPMG, 2017c) and after that he was taken for his position of audit assistant,

as one of the best performings in the program. Being part of the “KPMG Foundation” first Respondent 1 also mentions that educational project is one which helps to the student and graduates achieve competitiveness in modern Ukrainian situation.

Coca-Cola Beverages Ukraine is “very socially responsible company, so we have a lot of

different social projects and social innovation” (Respondent 2). Coca-Cola in Ukraine has

(37)

30

innovation project that introduces the first educational iLearn project in Ukraine, which enables children from boarding schools to get prepared for entering the university (Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company, 2017b). Respondent 3 is participating in Development of Community, which is mainly helping the local community where the company operates to develop their infrastructure as well as taking responsibility of the historical castle in Lviv region (Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company, 2017c; Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company, 2017d). Moreover, Respondent 3 is in charge of the “Every drop matters” project which is a first and unique project in Ukraine about the responsible attitude towards water resources and increasing access to safe drinking water for communities. For this project company is actively collaborating with the local communities, authorities, youth and local businesses (Coca-Cola company, 2017b). Respondent 4 participates in the Environmental project “Near Loss” which was developed in the production in order to improve the awareness of the employees about wastes and enhance their commitment to both the company’s and society's sustainability (Coca-cola Hellenic Bottling Company, 2014).

One of the important aspects and a trend which we learned from the interviews from Porsche

Holding in Austria and Ukraine is digitalization. Digitalization in the company is used in

both social and business projects, where social innovation is used for the internal and external needs, for better working experience for employees and contribution to society, respectively. Nowadays, there is a pilot version of Porsche app (Respondent 5 took part in creating it) which will cover two aspects: networking and education. The app is designed to increase communication between the employees and interchange of the knowledge and educational material as well as apply for education projects what lead to the better quality of their work. Furthermore, it also helps with the distribution of initiatives in work. From the insider's information (internal achievements magazine) revealed that one of the offices fully supports an initiative from the employee to commission led lamps, another initiative was the invention of one switcher for one working place, which allows offices to reduce the usage of the electricity for 20% and 60% respectively. Those initiatives are important to municipal interest scale to the city where the offices located and have an impact on the community where they operate.

(38)

31

Holding (business) so as to sustain the business location and improve the quality of life in local community (Porsche Holding, 2017a).

Philips Company has several divisions which are mainly created not for profit as African

incubator and Philips Foundation. Those organizations main aim is to improve the life of people solving social issues and improve health care situation (Respondent 7,8 and 9). African incubator’s main aim is to provide Africa with innovations which can address key challenges on the continent (Philips, 2017h). According to the Respondent 7, who was participating in the development of the energy harvesting tools for the hospital in the rural area of Africa, where the energy states that most of the social innovations are driven by the invention of healthcare which is applied to the countries with limited resources (Respondent 7, Philips, 2017f). The main aim of Philips Foundation is to improve people’s lives in disadvantaged and underserved communities, mobilizing their expertise, innovations and global partnerships to the benefit of young and underprivileged people and communities around the world (Philips, 2017i). Respondent 8 provided us with information about the project in China which mainly focuses on a health care support during pregnancy as well as the invention of a tool to communicate between the pregnant mother and babies after the children policy changed in 2016. Respondent 9 informed us about his involvement in a social innovation project, called “Maternal and Newborn Health Innovations Project.” Philips Foundation, together with the Government of Kenya and the Project’s Steering Committee at the Ministry of Health, UNICEF, are facilitating the development of innovative health technology and solutions in the field of maternal, newborn and child health in Kenya (Philips, 2017g; Philips Exposure, 2017). All the respondent emphasize that all the innovations which are created for the social mission not for profit generation and they are willing to contribute to communities (Respondent 7,8 and 9).

4.3 Driving Forces of MNCs Towards Social Innovation 4.3.1 Individualistic Perspective

4.3.1.1 Philanthropy

(39)

32

started as a family business and each employee has the opportunity to bring the innovation, it is common that people take the initiative to make social innovation to improve the overall impact of the company on the environment, as well as develop territories and communities.

Respondent 7 and 8 (Philips) while introducing the project were focusing our attention on the matter that all the projects they conduct refer to the will of the company to address social issues. However, social innovations are

“not a philanthropy, there is a mission of the company we are stuck to”(Respondent 7).

Moreover, the similar statement was stated from Coca-Cola as if all three respondents mentioned that usually the projects are driven as a part of the corporate culture.

4.3.1.2 Ethics

According to Respondent 1 (KPMG) mentioned that each person could contribute and the company is open to all the initiatives of the individual which can be driven by their ethical beliefs. However, he did not mention any projects he can identify as ethnically driven. Respondent 2 mentioned that educational project which was run by Coca-Cola was a situational innovation as if the project started during the eastern conflict in Ukraine. While respondent 3 and 4 (Coca-Cola) had difficulty to answer and just mentioned that the employees do contribute to all projects which are run by the company.

Respondent 5 and 6 (Porsche Holding) mentioned that before having started to work in the company, all the employees were trained according to Code of Conduct (CoC). Respondent 6 also states that CoC unifies with ethics of the person and lead to the strong ethical beliefs:

“...however, I cannot verify whether it is ethics that drives individuals to conduct the Social Innovation” (Respondent 6)

While Respondent 7 and 9 (Philips) stated that it is hard to measure to which extent ethics of people who develop the project of SI influences their innovativeness. However, according to the feeling of respect which Respondent 8 (Philips) has to the woman, “Maternal and

Newborn Health Innovations Project” was important to contribute.

4.3.1.3 Self-awareness

(40)

33

“Our social mission is not to lose control and not to screw up by going forward faster, than we can handle. (Respondent 1)”

Respondent 3 and 4 (Coca-Cola) mentioned that projects would not be possible to successfully implement without self-awareness of the employees about the power they have in solving social issues. Respondent 2 (Coca-Cola), stated that iLearn project it was driven by awareness of the situation in Ukraine and possibility to help to someone in need as well as market demand on the development of level of education for the new generation. Moreover, Respondent 3 mentioned that it was employees’ initiative to take care about the historic castle in Lviv, while “Every drop matters” project was conducted from top management, both projects considered being territorial development which was driven by self-awareness of the employees. Respondent 4 (Coca-Cola), stated that the project “Near Loss” would be impossible to implement if there were no awareness and commitment from the employees. Respondent 5 (Porsche), mentioned once again the CEO who introduced several social projects and employees who in with their initiative created the app to improve the communication in the company could be considered as self-awareness.

Respondent 6 (Porsche), repeats that as if the company was established as a family company, it somehow creates the awareness of the previous SI projects done and the will to conduct to new solutions. Moreover, Respondent 7 (Philips) stated that the innovation on energy harvesting was developed by the R&D division which is not related to the African incubator, however, was introduced to the top management, as a solution for the hospitals in the rural area in Africa. However, Respondent 8 (Philips) does not relate this driving force for the project he was involved. Respondent 9 stated that it is the mission of the Philips Foundation to drive the SI.

“First of all, it is a part of the mission in the company...and it is the official target...” (Respondent 9)

4.3.2 Organizational Perspective 4.3.2.1 New Business Opportunities

Respondent 1 (KPMG) stated that those educational project "KPMG Laboratory" and

“KPMG Foundation” help students and postgraduates to get the qualified practices and help

References

Related documents

73 % of the respondents (Figure 35) are already looking for performance tests online before choosing a new smartphone but smartphone performance comparisons is rare and hard to find,

Once again it is the case of Manchester United and Juventus that opposes from what the theory says, Manchester United has higher wages expenditure than both Juventus

Thus, even though the findings from literature argue that it is important to make sure that employees have the possibility to allocate free time on creative projects and ideas,

As highlighted in the theoretical framework, up to the present time there are barely few and very wide, advanced studies and connections between employee engagement and

In order for IT platforms used for idea sharing to be successful, they need to be able to encourage postings and responses from the participants, opportunities for

Research limitations Focusing on Chinese MNCs, this thesis deals with the internationalization strategies of emerging market MNCs entering developed markets1. As

Thereinafter, literature overview section on foreign divestments suggests that there is a lack of research in defining relationships between international strategy and divestment

Lastly, in the case study we have only chosen the OI initiatives which can be associated with the drug discovery and development phase of the industry value chain as